No, Including Stream-Safe Music Options In Games Isn't The Solution To Game-Stream Takedowns
from the pretzel-logic dept
Streaming and video games are becoming quite a thing, as you likely know. Once met with rebukes such as "Why would anyone want to watch other people play video games?", game-streaming has gotten very large, very fast, such that there are now several outlets one can go to to see live streams and on-demand streams of games. But because, to bastardize a Christopher Hitchens book title, permission culture poisons everything, game streaming is finding itself having to leap over a copyright hurdle in the form of music within games. One solution, employed by the popular Twitch, was to simply silence any video in which a game's music could be heard. This method is patently ridiculous, of course, as a majority of games do indeed have music and silent streams are largely worthless in terms of entertainment value. But at least Twitch's move had the unintended consequence of highlighting just how burdensome our permission culture has become, in knee-capping game-streams, which are ultimately useful to game-makers, in favor of copyright protection. It's easy to see how everyone loses and why everyone loses when Twitch streams are silenced, in other words.
A much worse "solution" to this problem is touted by Kotaku, using the game Concrete Jungle as its example, a game which includes a settings option for "stream-safe music."
I wrote (and spoke) about Concrete Jungle a bit a few weeks ago, but feel like pointing this out again: for all the game’s good points, one of its best inclusions is a seemingly harmless little checkbox at the bottom of the game’s settings menu. There it is. “Stream-Safe Music”. For starters, it’s a helpful little explainer as to why so many videos get taken down! Some people may not realise that, when licensing music, sometimes different rights apply to YouTube as do the game itself. So while it’s cool for a game to include music, it might not be cool for a video of the game to be on YouTube.But that's the thing: it isn't a workaround to the problem at all, assuming the problem we're talking about is a complicated series of licensing schemes that ultimately disappear content, generate little to no revenue (as evidenced by Twitch simply turning the sound off), and stem from a permission culture that is entirely out of control. What creating stream-safe music options does is ignore the problem entirely. Far from creating any kind of resolution, actively pimping an option that requires game-makers and streamers to twist themselves into a pretzel to avoid DMCA takedowns is cheering for unproductive effort. Nobody benefits from this, and everyone loses. Game-makers lose because it makes streaming their games require more effort, which means some streamers simply will give up therefore decreasing the exposure the game could receive. Music makers lose because most of their music will never be heard on the stream, either because videos will be silenced, DMCA'd, or because everyone will be using the stream-safe option when they stream. And gamers lose because, as much as in film, music plays a huge role in the atmosphere of many video games.
More importantly, though, it’s a one-click workaround to the problem. Tick that box and only the music that’s 100% cool to be played on YouTube will be played while you record/stream.
What sounds like a reasonable attempt to get around the stupidity of copyright effecting game streams is instead an unreasonable request that everyone ignore the actual problem and allow it to fester. That isn't how you fix things. It's how you allow a problem to become worse.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, music, stream safe, streaming, video games
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Providing "Stream-Safe Music"
All that the checkbox has to do is to replace all normal game music with "Happy Birthday to You" stuck in an endless loop. We already KNOW that song is ok due to a recent ruling. For variation play it faster, slower, or in a different pitch. If it's a tension scene, play it out of tune.But then does someone else own the words to that song? Maybe we should come up with our own, right now:
I'm going to kill you,
You're going to be blue.
Quit jump-ing 'round so much,
I'm going to kill you.
made the First Word by Dark Helmet
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
But wait, it gets worse
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: But wait, it gets worse
The problem stems from the belief that there are billions of dollars that magically will appear if they manage the control of it just right. This leads to the insanity where zomg someone might not make a few hundred they deserve!!!
Rather than try to solve the problem, they don't dare look at the failing model they instead try to force everyone else to bear the costs and burdens to play inside the rules.
People want to share, and this is/could be a huge boon to the corporations but now that we have to have "Stream Safe" as a fscking game setting. The news would like to report from outside of the venue, but they have to overdub Happy Birthday in the background because someone MIGHT hear a snippet of a song.
We have beloved tv shows we want to own, but have to accept them being different than our memories because ZOMG millions!
Now games won't sound like what we saw, because someone owns the rights to the pew pew noise the gun makes, and someone else owns the rights to the footsteps, and someone else owns the musical stinger... and no one will just sign contracts to deal with reality... because everyone deserves the millions, that don't exist, in their bank account.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That means it is working, by limiting permissions to the chosen few corporations. The only time things, where the copyright is assigned to a corporation, get widely licensed is when the licensing is mandatory.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: But wait, it gets worse
I'll accept that you're right on one account:
"because everyone deserves the millions, that don't exist, in their bank account"
Technically, assuming those assets actually value millions, the creators do deserve fair compensation. That's the law actually.
But, as you've said, that money doesn't actually exist. Either because... [GASP!] the assets aren't actually worththat much, or because there isn't that much money to be made in the first place.
Also "Lost money" calculations presented to the press and law (not shareholders) are generally made based on "what we used to sell back when physical media was king and the economy was good".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: But wait, it gets worse
Except, as mentioned above, it doesn't avoid the problem. It delays it and still doesn't guarantee that the bots and so on don't incorrectly flag this music anyway. This is papering over some cracks, at best, it does nothing to fix the crumbling foundations.
"the creators do deserve fair compensation"
Very few people argue that they shouldn't. What they argue are the methods by which this is obtained and the collateral damage and unintended consequences that damage consumers and artists alike. Work out a system that's actually fair, that treats independents and major labels alike and protects the rights of everyone involved - including consumers - and we're talking. So far, all the schemes have been to "protect" the major labels at the expense of everyone else, and are often counter-productive even to their needs.
"Also "Lost money" calculations presented to the press and law (not shareholders) are generally made based on "what we used to sell back when physical media was king and the economy was good"."
...and thus as irrelevant to the modern marketplace as piano roll sales were to the era of The Beatles. Whatever else happens, that marketplace no longer exists. It's about time this was accepted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Streaming DLC
EA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Streaming DLC
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ok the easy solution
[ link to this | view in thread ]
your going to need a liscence to poo
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: ok the easy solution
If that meant "use non-copyrighted music" - thanks to the actions of maximalists there's virtually no such thing any more, and their poorly programmed bots will happily flag up public domain and CC licensed music anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Watch JurorSeven Carefully
Oh..watch Dawg..
He's NULLIFYIN..
BAMB..
DoH.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Streaming DLC
Yep. I'd buy that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Providing "Stream-Safe Music"
But then does someone else own the words to that song? Maybe we should come up with our own, right now:
I'm going to kill you,
You're going to be blue.
Quit jump-ing 'round so much,
I'm going to kill you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Little copyright DMCA trolls pop up while listening to tunes doing yard work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: But wait, it gets worse
It's not a question of whether the game gets hit with a copyright claim, it's a matter of when, and how much the rightsholders think you should be fucked over.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: But wait, it gets worse
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stream Silencing Clarification
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: your going to need a liscence to poo
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is terrific!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: your going to need a liscence to poo
[ link to this | view in thread ]
To better serve
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not sure how youtube handles its livestreams, ContentID shenanagans and such.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
How safe is it?
And all this jumps past the larger copyright question - Nintendo and other companies are claiming a copyright on the Videos of the game. Can we replace the graphics with non-copyrighted game characters and art?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You do what you can, with what you have.
So, yeah. Or rather, no. That isn't the problem Concrete Jungle is addressing. Concrete Jungle is simply trying to help players keep their streams from being taken down. They've already seen YOUR problem, and decided they don't have the resources (legal or otherwise) to win it.
And please note that yes, they have contributed their part in your own fight, by providing something you can point to and say "See? See!? This is what happens!"
When you have a choice, choose battles you can win.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twitch does NOT silence live streams. YouTube's new gaming platform DOES.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
My point is that it was the actions of the industry that drove me away. They lost out on purchases that I would have continued to make for myself and, additionally, for the kids. Perhaps I'm alone or in the minority but I'd like to believe that some percentage of consumers share my frustration and are collectively impacting sales figures.
Most game companies suck. Copyright sucks. I don't need the extra headaches so, fuck 'em...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Need to turn the tables
Should be able to bill them every time their junk music is forced down your throat during games. The game likely cost way more than a song and the music often detracts from rather than enhances the experience as you can't escape from it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
http://blog.twitch.tv/2014/08/3136/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Still, that is the story the original article was referencing and it's not hard to imagine the same restrictions being placed on streaming content. YouTube have had their hand forced largely because they're the biggest target, not because Google is less inclined than Amazon to appease demands by rightsholders over customers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]